The US military might not be the best in the world anymore, according to an army captain

At the squad, platoon, and company level, the U.S. Army is not as good as its allies, reports an Army captain. “American units are not as prepared or ready for combat as their multinational partners are at company level and below,” writes Capt. J. Scott Metz. “Many of our allies, and likely some of our potential enemies, are now tactically better than we are at company level and below because we do not train enough at home station.”

In other words, they don’t learn the fundamentals of maneuver before going for higher training at the Joint Multinational Readiness Center (JMRC), the big U.S. Army training base in Hohenfels, Germany. He should know. Until recently, Capt. Metz was an observer/controller/trainer at the JMRC. He notes that he has worked with units from 11 nations.

Comments

To comment on this article please join/login.
Here's a sample of the comments on this post.

nitro58

David,
I agree with most of those points. Thank you for added clarity.
My opinion, our last CIC was very naive, to lessen the nations military.
Why yes, I am Captain Obvious lol.

David F

The title is a bit sensationalist, the point the Capt. was making was that he has observed via countless rotations, that our units have become less tactically proficient in some cases than other allied units that have gone through JMRC.
We can still be the best in a general sense and yet lack proficiency in some areas, especially as they relate to fighting adversaries in a more conventional context against enemy units of similar training and equipment. We really haven't fought a conflict like that since Korea, and to a much more limited extent the first Gulf War.
Also there is a serious issue now where units are required to do all these non-combat related tasks just to meet the minimum required standards, this cuts into training time and makes whatever training is done, is just not as good. If you combine that with the budget cuts and issues you mentioned, it should not be surprising that we are having issues with capability.
Backing each other no matter what is great, and thank God the military has the support it does from the public in general and veterans like yourself, but pride cannot blind us to a need to improve and address problems before the lead to people getting killed unnecessarily in the future.

David F

In terms of dealing with the effects of combat and keeping ones cool you are 100% correct, but what the article is talking about is the specific use of tactics, especially those that have to do with facing peer or near peer competitors like China or Russia in a more conventional war. Over a decade of fighting low intensity conflicts against badly trained insurgents may have negatively affected our readiness when it comes to dealing with enemies that can are more likely to inflict direct casualties on us, i.e not just those caused by IEDs. One thing is moving an armor platoon in the battlefield against insurgents armed with RPGs, another is to maneuver and kill enemy tanks that can actually kill you, that is what the Capt. says is lacking. Plus how many of those NCOs and Officers will be gone in the next 10 years, leaving us with a majority of junior leaders who have not gone into combat? That is why training standards have to be maintained over the long haul, we can't just depend on combat experience to win the next war, especially if the combat is totally different than what those veterans have faced in the past.

Below is the link to the actual article as cited by Thomas Rick's blog, then Business Insider, and then SOFREP. The actual article itself is much better than the sensational synopses. For example: "The problem is primarily the overwhelming amount of non-training tasks we place on our subordinates" and "Finally, we must change the Army culture to allow subordinate leaders to have flexibility to train their units based on commander’s intent rather than a long list of specified requirements." Highly recommended read.
http://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2017/Spring/2Metz17.pdf